Quote:

AlphaFalfa said:Oh Im not sure what the last part was trying to contextualize, the self-sustainable group part?

---

Quote:

Creation seems to come out of imperfection. It seems to come out of a striving and a frustration. And this is where I think language came from. I mean, it came from our desire to transcend our isolation and have some sort of connection with one another. And it had to be easy when it was just simple survival. Like, you know, "water." We came up with a sound for that. Or "Saber-toothed tiger right behind you." We came up with a sound for that. But when it gets really interesting, I think, is when we use that same system of symbols to communicate all the abstract and intangible things that we're experiencing. What is, like, frustration? Or what is anger or love? When I say "love," the sound comes out of my mouth and it hits the other person's ear, travels through this Byzantine conduit in their brain, you know, through their memories of love or lack of love, and they register what I'm saying and they say yes, they understand. But how do I know they understand? Because words are inert. They're just symbols. They're dead, you know? And so much of our experience is intangible. So much of what we perceive cannot be expressed. It's unspeakable. And yet, you know, when we communicate with one another, and we feel that we've connected, and we think that we're understood, I think we have a feeling of almost spiritual communion. And that feeling might be transient, but I think it's what we live for.

---

AlphaFalfa said:

Ironically, the word I used was effective to communicating the meaning I was intending on conveying.



The only reason that you think its a tid-bid I imagine is because you justify language based on the extent to its common usage.

I justify language to the extent that it is useful. Even if that means justifying it based on common usage because god doesnt care if you have self-love, self respect or integrity, because nothing cannot care.

---

Alrighty then. You're welcome.
You fail @ homonyms, don't worry though, it's common. You sea? I mean, you see?


p.s., you're missing a bunch of conjunctions

onelight said:

The problem with 'fixing' the meaning behind words is that words are what we fix over the unfixable.

We have a habit of trying to pin down a fluid, transient reality with the seeming solidity and permanence of symbols.  What's more difficult to see is that the symbols themselves, along with all else, are not solid or permanent at all. 

To try and fix unique symbols to every possible context of experience would be a literally endless task.  I feel it's easier to treat words as what they are -- conventions which should not be given too much weight or be taken too seriously.

---

That is the irony, when we miscommunicate we only have words to solves our problems. In a retrospective reconstruction that is not nessecarily true. We are not limited to using words to communicate. We could also point to objects, with our finger. Ie. If you were standing beside me and I was talking about grass in the context of it being used in a composting solution and I used the word, blue-grass to signify the best type of grass for a compost solution, even if you could not conceptualize of 'blue grass', I could potentially spot it out on a field and literally point you to it, for your own observation.

The last part of your post is contradictory. If you believe words are unique symbols of objects, then what you said would be unquestionably impossible to understand. How do I know that the symbol, 'symbol' for example, doesnt refer to banana? The whole reasoning behind words and their use, comes from the very idea that you can use them perfectly, without doubt of potential uncertainties in the interpretative process of communication.

Another problem with your way of perceiving words is that when you say, given to much weight or taken to seriously, it would be impossible to trully gather any meaning from and use from. Rather, it would be much more useful and meaningful(as a measurement of whether it brings you towards your goals) to specify locations in the communication process where taking time to ensure a unified form of symbolize is what each person communicating is utilizing. Ie. With people, I usually take time to clarify(given that the person understand communication similairly) and ensure a unified symbology in our words, when we begin to communicate in the context of what our; intentions are towards each other, our emotions are towards each other, our ethics are for the things that are important to each other and the problems and benefits of having a relationship with each other. The reason being that these parts of the communication process are crucial elements to how a person experiences what you give them, because as a concept of what you are 'giving' completely depends on what is interpreted as 'given' by the receiver.

This form of communication takes control of any damages that occur from muscommunication and it extends our capacity to influence our relationships in a wholesome way, with a higher sense of stability(less emotional rolercoasters that are useless and painful)

Ever since I have employed this method with my girlfriend, we have not argued and gotten bitter towards each other. Nor were we presented what occured before, a deep sense of disapointment that occured because we did not communicate in a unified symbology. We also never have arguments about what we said or did not say. Mostly because we understand that words cannot be argued over, because words are merly sensory encrytions that act as a way to describe not as actual representations of reality.

AlphaFalfa said:

The last part of your post is contradictory. If you believe words are unique symbols of objects, then what you said would be unquestionably impossible to understand. How do I know that the symbol, 'symbol' for example, doesnt refer to banana? The whole reasoning behind words and their use, comes from the very idea that you can use them perfectly, without doubt of potential uncertainties in the interpretative process of communication.

---